The EPL is officially the best !
Jellore
stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
to the last 8.
Diabolik
"Jellore" <jel...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:03e08bb6-f474-4524...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> Last year's CL's results were not a blip. Looking at this year's Group
> stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> in Europe.
Very Simplistic way to judge.
> It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> to the last 8.
Did England make it to the finals of Euro 2008?
No;)
Jellore
> "Jellore" <jell...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
How else do you gauge success ?
BTW I was talking of the EPL not the English national team. Two
different beasts altogether.
Diabolik
> On Dec 12, 11:37 pm, "Diabolik" <Diabo...@noemail.com> wrote:
> > "Jellore" <jell...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:03e08bb6-f474-4524...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > Last year's CL's results were not a blip. Looking at this year's Group
> > > stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> > > in Europe.
> >
> > Very Simplistic way to judge.
> >
> > > It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> > > for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> > > to the last 8.
> >
> > Did England make it to the finals of Euro 2008?
> >
> > No;)
>
> How else do you gauge success ?
If they make the last 8 of the CL, maybe.
>
> BTW I was talking of the EPL not the English national team. Two
> different beasts altogether.
I think they are directly related.
English players play in the EPL.
Paul C
Eh?
There are 20 clubs in the EPL. How can you judge it by the performance
of its top 4.
In truth the EPL has 4 decent teams and an awful lot of dross. If we
are judging a league by its strength-in-depth Spain's Primera Division
leaves the Premier League way behind.
scoop
> > BTW I was talking of the EPL not the English national team. Two
> > different beasts altogether.
>
> I think they are directly related.
>
To judge the EPL on the basis of the quality of the english national
team is idiotic.
Team English Starters
Arsenal 1
Chelsea 4 or so
ManU 4 or so
Liverpool 2 or 3
Portsmouth 3
ManCity 3
etc...
Paul C
wrote:
HArdly. In the last round of ECL matches there were more Scots playing
in the Champions League than English footballers.
nj
One of the best. EPL, La Liga and Serie A are all equally good.
That's more than enough leagues for a soccer fan to follow. And if
you are an American who has seen all of his professional sports ruined
by greed, the top 4 or 5 European football leagues are a sight for
sore eyes. Yes, from what I hear, football in Europe is not the same
as it was, but it's no comparison to how American greed has completely
ravaged the top 4 or five sports here in the U.S. - especially the
NFL, NBA and the NHL.
Jellore
> "Jellore" <jell...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> news:604376c1-207f-41fc...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Dec 12, 11:37 pm, "Diabolik" <Diabo...@noemail.com> wrote:
> > > "Jellore" <jell...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:03e08bb6-f474-4524...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > Last year's CL's results were not a blip. Looking at this year's Group
> > > > stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> > > > in Europe.
>
> > > Very Simplistic way to judge.
>
> > > > It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> > > > for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> > > > to the last 8.
>
> > > Did England make it to the finals of Euro 2008?
>
> > > No;)
>
> > How else do you gauge success ?
>
> If they make the last 8 of the CL, maybe.
>
>
>
> > BTW I was talking of the EPL not the English national team. Two
> > different beasts altogether.
>
> I think they are directly related.
> English players play in the EPL.
Well all four did last year, and three of those went further.
Jellore
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:32:11 -0800 (PST), Jellore
>
By decent I suppose you mean four teasm are in the top 8 clubs of
Europe. So what is your definition of those who only qualify for
earlier group stages ? Woeful ?
I am not so sure on your comparision with the Spain's Primera. I watch
it avidly, and really can't see much difference between say Villareal
and Portsmouth or say between Getafe and West Ham. Levante are on a
par with Wigan etc. However Spains recent Uefa results have been far
superior to Englands.
Jellore
You can not compare the EPL with the English national team
MH
The EPL is not officially the best until it overtakes Spain in the UEFA
coefficients.
This may well happen in the next year or two, but hasn't happened quite yet.
The encouraging thing for the EPL is the stronger UEFA cup performances
this year, showing that the team lower in the table have probably
improved a bit in the last couple of years.
Jack Hollis
Just look at the UEFA Coefficients based on each leagues' performance
in both European Cups. England, Spain and Italy have a total of 8
teams in both competitions. That's a pretty fair comparison of the
leagues.
To be considered the #1 league you have to be the best over the
previous five years. Right now, Spain is still on top, but England is
closing in fast. If they continue to do well this year and the
results from 2003/2004 drop out at the end of the season, England
could have the top ranked league at the start of the season next year.
Enzo
Also all 3 EPL reps are leading their groups in the UEFA Cup.
Enzo [ best yes, best to watch, no ]
Matthias Mühlich
> And if
> you are an American who has seen all of his professional sports ruined
> by greed,
Can you explain this in more detail, please?
MM
Matthias Mühlich
> Also all 3 EPL reps are leading their groups in the UEFA Cup.
No correct comparison as some teams in the UC groups have played 4
matches while others only have played 3. For instance, Bolton could very
well end up fourth, in spite of leading their table now with one game
more played than their contenders.
MM
Enzo
wrote:
They could.
Enzo [ Bayern doing very badly in a poor group ]
Matthias Mühlich
> Bayern doing very badly in a poor group
"very badly" ist too strong. "Not convincing" seems more adequate to me.
In the end, the only aim is advancing. With one win, two draws and a
home game left, they still have everything in their hands. (However, I
would not mind if they are eliminated by Aris next week.)
MM
PB
> The encouraging thing for the EPL is the stronger UEFA cup performances
> this year, showing that the team lower in the table have probably
> improved a bit in the last couple of years.
The Premiership looks to be spreading even further apart. In addition
to sending the entire Big Four to the Champions League for four years
running (and probably five), this year's UEFA Cup participants have
all been in Europe recently. Spurs and Blackburn were there last year,
Everton and Bolton the year before. Meanwhile, at the bottom of the
table, Wigan and Derby are averaging less than a point a game
*combined*.
P
Diabolik
"scoop" <bali_u...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:01f795b1-4998-4b01...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > BTW I was talking of the EPL not the English national team. Two
> > > different beasts altogether.
> >
> > I think they are directly related.
> > English players play in the EPL.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> To judge the EPL on the basis of the quality of the english national
> team is idiotic.
Why? Even though there aren't many English starters, quality foreign players
improve the standard of English players and knowledge of football.
scoop
> Why? Even though there aren't many English starters, quality foreign players
> improve the standard of English players and knowledge of football.
Sure. I think foreign talent is good for a league. Any league that
gets more talent is improved. Maybe this will help the english
national team in the long run.
But most of the top players in the EPL aren't eligble for the English
national team. The two things aren't connected.
Would you say that Greece has a top league based on its Euro victory?
Matthias Mühlich
> Would you say that Greece has a top league based on its Euro victory?
Greek football has developed a lot since Otto Rehhagel became the
national team coach (especially after the surprising EC victory).
Currently, they are the only UEFA country with all teams technically
left in the European competitions (although Larissa cannot qualify for
the next round anymore). Being #7 so far in this year's UEFA ratings is
not bad for a relatively small country like Greece.
I think that national team success helps the domestic league and vice versa.
MH
PB wrote:
> On Dec 12, 1:01 pm, MH <nos...@ucalgary.ca> wrote:
>
>>The encouraging thing for the EPL is the stronger UEFA cup performances
>>this year, showing that the team lower in the table have probably
>>improved a bit in the last couple of years.
>
>
> The Premiership looks to be spreading even further apart.
Perhaps, but it looks more as though it is spreading around a different
break point. Instead of 4 elite teams, and then nothing much, the
chasing pack seems a bit more accomplished - even than in 2004-2005,
when Everton finished 4th with a less talented team (certainly less
depth on the bench) than their current one.
PB
> It looks more as though it is spreading around a different
> break point. Instead of 4 elite teams, and then nothing much, the
> chasing pack seems a bit more accomplished - even than in 2004-2005,
> when Everton finished 4th with a less talented team (certainly less
> depth on the bench) than their current one.
This may be true, but I don't think the 04/05 Everton team is a good
choice of reference. On either side of that season, it finished in the
bottom half of the table, suggesting that its record was largely a
measure of good fortune rather than a fair reflection of its relative
quality. That's a contrast with the current Everton squad, which is
having a steadier run of success.
Getting back to shifts in EPL balance, in 2004/05, a team could finish
fourth with only 61 points. This year, there are still nine teams on
pace for more than that.
P
Diabolik
> On Dec 13, 2:09 pm, "Diabolik" <Diabo...@noemail.com> wrote:
> > Why? Even though there aren't many English starters, quality foreign
players
> > improve the standard of English players and knowledge of football.
>
> Sure. I think foreign talent is good for a league. Any league that
> gets more talent is improved. Maybe this will help the english
> national team in the long run.
>
> But most of the top players in the EPL aren't eligble for the English
> national team. The two things aren't connected.
But many of the top players are.
Rooney, Lampard, Gerrard, Cole, etc...
>
> Would you say that Greece has a top league based on its Euro victory?
They have improved, you can see it by the teams in the CL.
Olympiacos made the last 16, ahead of Lazio and W. Bremen.
Diabolik
"Paul C" <pa...@thersgb.net> wrote in message
news:nh80m39e113nso7b9...@4ax.com...
Well the best English players play in the CL.
Rooney, Gerrard, etc...
Jellore
> "Paul C" <p...@thersgb.net> wrote in message
>
> news:nh80m39e113nso7b9...@4ax.com...> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:36:22 +1100, "Diabolik" <Diabo...@noemail.com>
Rio F; Owen Hargreaves; Michael Carrick; Joe Cole; Frank Lampard;
Peter Crouch. I would love to see a few more English players in the CL
such as Michael Owen, Aaron Lennon etc
kenh...@hotmail.com
> "scoop" <bali_ultim...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:46bb2497-f30e-45dd...@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Dec 13, 2:09 pm, "Diabolik" <Diabo...@noemail.com> wrote:
> > > Why? Even though there aren't many English starters, quality foreign
> players
> > > improve the standard of English players and knowledge of football.
>
> > Sure. I think foreign talent is good for a league. Any league that
> > gets more talent is improved. Maybe this will help the english
> > national team in the long run.
>
> > But most of the top players in the EPL aren't eligble for the English
> > national team. The two things aren't connected.
>
> But many of the top players are.
> Rooney, Lampard, Gerrard, Cole, etc...
>
But they play for different teams. The strength of teams like Chelsea
and Man U doesn't correlate to the strength of the national team.
Look at Real 56-61.
On that criteria, Spain ought to have blitzed international
competition.
>
>
> > Would you say that Greece has a top league based on its Euro victory?
>
> They have improved, you can see it by the teams in the CL.
>
> Olympiacos made the last 16, ahead of Lazio and W. Bremen.
And?
One team making the last 16 of EC1 does not make a top league.
It means they have one fairly decent club side.
How many French teams have had success at EC1?
Does this make France a rubbish national team?
The fact is, clubs operate differently to national teams.
They buy players to fill specific roles (and the wealthier clubs can
buy better players, and more of them).
National teams can't do that.
If they need, say, an attacking left sided midfielder, they can't buy
one. They have to either use a stop-gap, or put someone in who happens
to be the best available.
Wealthy clubs identify a need and then buy a player to fill that role.
It doesn't matter if he is from Iceland, if he can do the job and the
club can afford him, they can buy him.
The flip side is that National teams have a larger pool of players to
choose from. There may be an oversupply of, say, decent strikers; so
you choose the best one or two. Or you may be fortunate and have a
couple of excellent players for every position
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
Jellore wrote:
> Last year\'s CL\'s results were not a blip. Looking at this year\'s Group
> stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> to the last 8.
Don\'t you think it would be apt to rename the league to the English-
based-Foreigners Premier League, or EbFPL in short?
kenh...@hotmail.com
I'm assuming from your nic that you're a Barca fan.
I suppose the names Ronaldhinio, Henry, Messi etc mean nothing to you
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
Lovely players, so you do agree that the EPL should be renamed to the
EbFPL? How many Englishmen are there on the top English clubs? :)
Jellore
Oh dear jealously is an awful burden to carry around with you.
Jellore
Apart from Arsenal, each of the other tops clubs, Man U; Liverpool and
Chelsea have their share. Especially Man U and Chelsea, between them
almost half the English team.
kenh...@hotmail.com
>
Not really.
I agree that the EPL has caught up with Leagues like Spain & Italy
which have been bases for foreign players for decades.
If you're a true Barca fan, you'll be able to rattle off a couple of
dozen top-quality foreign imports who've graced the Nou Camp since the
time of Cruyff.
Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
;-)
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
It sure is. I support the World Cup winners, who do you support? ;)
barca4...@hotmail.com
Bit of an exaggeration. Their top players are foreigners :)
EbFPL...it's quite catchy you know :))
barca4...@hotmail.com
kenhig...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 15, 1:14 pm, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > kenhig...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Dec 15, 10:54 am, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > Jellore wrote:
> > > > > Last year\\\'s CL\\\'s results were not a blip. Looking at this year\\\'s Group
> > > > > stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> > > > > in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> > > > > for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> > > > > to the last 8.
> >
> > > > Don\\\'t you think it would be apt to rename the league to the English-
> > > > based-Foreigners Premier League, or EbFPL in short?
> >
> > > I\'m assuming from your nic that you\'re a Barca fan.
> >
> > > I suppose the names Ronaldhinio, Henry, Messi etc mean nothing to you
> >
> > > Higgs
> >
> > Lovely players, so you do agree that the EPL should be renamed to the
> > EbFPL? How many Englishmen are there on the top English clubs? :)- Hide quoted text -
> Not really.
> I agree that the EPL has caught up with Leagues like Spain & Italy
> which have been bases for foreign players for decades.
EPL has surpassed them, though apart from Inter, the top teams in
Spain and Italy are still comprised of a lot of their own domestic
players.
> If you're a true Barca fan, you'll be able to rattle off a couple of
> dozen top-quality foreign imports who've graced the Nou Camp since the
> time of Cruyff.
Yes of course I would, but that wasn't my question was it?
> Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
> of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
> stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
Yes, but again that wasn't my question was it?
> At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
> ;-)
He played for Spain no? And again, it wasn't my question though I'll
take your attempts at diverting the topic as a positive reinforcement
of what I made simple for you :)
kenh...@hotmail.com
> kenhig...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 1:14 pm, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > kenhig...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Dec 15, 10:54 am, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > Jellore wrote:
> > > > > > Last year\\\'s CL\\\'s results were not a blip. Looking at this year\\\'s Group
> > > > > > stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> > > > > > in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> > > > > > for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> > > > > > to the last 8.
>
> > > > > Don\\\'t you think it would be apt to rename the league to the English-
> > > > > based-Foreigners Premier League, or EbFPL in short?
>
> > > > I\'m assuming from your nic that you\'re a Barca fan.
>
> > > > I suppose the names Ronaldhinio, Henry, Messi etc mean nothing to you
>
> > > > Higgs
>
> > > Lovely players, so you do agree that the EPL should be renamed to the
> > > EbFPL? How many Englishmen are there on the top English clubs? :)- Hide quoted text -
> > Not really.
> > I agree that the EPL has caught up with Leagues like Spain & Italy
> > which have been bases for foreign players for decades.
>
> EPL has surpassed them, though apart from Inter, the top teams in
> Spain and Italy are still comprised of a lot of their own domestic
> players.
>
Depends what you mean by a lot
Can you name a top team that doesn't contain a foreign import?
> > If you're a true Barca fan, you'll be able to rattle off a couple of
> > dozen top-quality foreign imports who've graced the Nou Camp since the
> > time of Cruyff.
>
> Yes of course I would, but that wasn't my question was it?
>
So you agree that Barca could be renamed The Spanish-based Foreigners
Club?
> > Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
> > of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
> > stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
>
> Yes, but again that wasn't my question was it?
>
So you are happy for Spanish clubs to import foreign players, but you
think it's a bit on the nose when English clubs do it?
Why is this?
> > At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
> > ;-)
>
> He played for Spain no? And again, it wasn't my question though I'll
> take your attempts at diverting the topic as a positive reinforcement
> of what I made simple for you :)- Hide quoted text -
>
Yes, Di Stefano played for Spain, but he wasn't Spanish. He also
played for Argentina and Columbia.
As for your question, I've answered that already. I assume your
reading skills are limited.
I take your attempts at avoiding answering the questions I've
subsequently asked as proof that you can't answer them
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
By this you are saying you do agree with my proposed EbFPL...then why
not just say so?
> > > Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
> > > of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
> > > stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
> >
> > Yes, but again that wasn't my question was it?
> >
>
> So you are happy for Spanish clubs to import foreign players, but you
> think it's a bit on the nose when English clubs do it?
Who said I thought it was a "bit on the nose" are you ok? I just
merely suggested that the EPL be aptly renamed.
> Why is this?
>
> > > At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
> > > ;-)
> >
> > He played for Spain no? And again, it wasn't my question though I'll
> > take your attempts at diverting the topic as a positive reinforcement
> > of what I made simple for you :)- Hide quoted text -
> >
>
> Yes, Di Stefano played for Spain, but he wasn't Spanish. He also
> played for Argentina and Columbia.
And? What does this have to do with what I proposed. I've asked you
several times now.
> As for your question, I've answered that already. I assume your
> reading skills are limited.
You did answer it. You are in agreement with me. I've already
acknowledged that several posting back. Congrats on seeing the light
Monsieur Higgs :))
kenh...@hotmail.com
No I'm not, I'm saying Barca could be renamed The Spanish-based
Foreigners Club.
If you agree with me, why not just say so?
> > > > Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
> > > > of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
> > > > stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
>
> > > Yes, but again that wasn't my question was it?
>
> > So you are happy for Spanish clubs to import foreign players, but you
> > think it's a bit on the nose when English clubs do it?
>
> Who said I thought it was a "bit on the nose" are you ok? I just
> merely suggested that the EPL be aptly renamed.
>
My suggestion is that it's hypocritical to feign anger at English
clubs importing foreign players, whilst supporting a club that has a
long tradition of importing foreign players.
> > Why is this?
>
> > > > At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
> > > > ;-)
>
> > > He played for Spain no? And again, it wasn't my question though I'll
> > > take your attempts at diverting the topic as a positive reinforcement
> > > of what I made simple for you :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Yes, Di Stefano played for Spain, but he wasn't Spanish. He also
> > played for Argentina and Columbia.
>
> And? What does this have to do with what I proposed. I've asked you
> several times now.
>
And I've answered several posts ago.
Why are you so reluctant to answer my questions when I freely answer
yours?
> > As for your question, I've answered that already. I assume your
> > reading skills are limited.
>
> You did answer it. You are in agreement with me. I've already
> acknowledged that several posting back. Congrats on seeing the light
> Monsieur Higgs :))- Hide quoted text -
>
If you believe that, your reading skills are even worse than I'd
suspected.
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
If you are suggesting that Barca could be renamed the SbFC because
this spectacular team has foreigners, then you are most certainly in
agreement that the EPL should be renamed the EbFPL for the same
reason. You're binding yourself with this comparison, not me ;)))
> > > > > Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
> > > > > of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
> > > > > stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
> >
> > > > Yes, but again that wasn't my question was it?
> >
> > > So you are happy for Spanish clubs to import foreign players, but you
> > > think it's a bit on the nose when English clubs do it?
> >
> > Who said I thought it was a "bit on the nose" are you ok? I just
> > merely suggested that the EPL be aptly renamed.
> >
>
> My suggestion is that it's hypocritical to feign anger at English
> clubs importing foreign players, whilst supporting a club that has a
> long tradition of importing foreign players.
Wow, I'm angry about it? Merely for pointing out that top English
clubs rely more on their imports than they do on the domestic players?
Why would I have to be angry to make this observation. Are you saying
that Liverpool is not 90% foreign? Arsenal too? Are you suggesting
that more than 50% of the players in the EbFPL are not foreign?
> > > Why is this?
> >
> > > > > At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
> > > > > ;-)
> >
> > > > He played for Spain no? And again, it wasn't my question though I'll
> > > > take your attempts at diverting the topic as a positive reinforcement
> > > > of what I made simple for you :)- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > Yes, Di Stefano played for Spain, but he wasn't Spanish. He also
> > > played for Argentina and Columbia.
> >
> > And? What does this have to do with what I proposed. I've asked you
> > several times now.
> >
>
> And I've answered several posts ago.
> Why are you so reluctant to answer my questions when I freely answer
> yours?
Your questions have no relevancy to my proposal, but merely a feigned
attempt at turning this on me, when in fact there's nothing to turn.
I'm not comparing La Liga to what we've both acknowledge to be the
EbFPL, am I? I'm not saying La Liga is better, or more moral,
superior, or whatever? I've just said that the EPL should be aptyl
renamed to the EbFPL because the best players, the best performers on
the best teams are all foreign. That was it. That was all I had to say
to get your feathers ruffelled Signor Higgs. Don't you think it's a
bit much to over react like you have?
kenh...@hotmail.com
Not at all, as I've made clear on several occasions.
Barca has a history stretching back 50 years of buying expensive
foreign imports, unlike, say, Chelsea and Arsenal.
Give the current trend another 30 years and I might be starting to
agree with you.
>
>
>
> > > > > > Likewise, as a follower of La Liga and EC1, you'll have some knowledge
> > > > > > of the great Real team of the 50s and 60s, led by those two Spanish
> > > > > > stalwarts Ferenc Puskas and Alfredo Di Stefano.
>
> > > > > Yes, but again that wasn't my question was it?
>
> > > > So you are happy for Spanish clubs to import foreign players, but you
> > > > think it's a bit on the nose when English clubs do it?
>
> > > Who said I thought it was a "bit on the nose" are you ok? I just
> > > merely suggested that the EPL be aptly renamed.
>
> > My suggestion is that it's hypocritical to feign anger at English
> > clubs importing foreign players, whilst supporting a club that has a
> > long tradition of importing foreign players.
>
> Wow, I'm angry about it? Merely for pointing out that top English
> clubs rely more on their imports than they do on the domestic players?
> Why would I have to be angry to make this observation. Are you saying
> that Liverpool is not 90% foreign? Arsenal too? Are you suggesting
> that more than 50% of the players in the EbFPL are not foreign?
>
>
No, you misunderstand.
I'm saying the EPL is shouldn't be named as you propose, that's all.
I keep reiterating this point, yet you continue to think I'm agreeing
with you.
>
>
>
> > > > Why is this?
>
> > > > > > At least the latter sounds vaguely Spanish (even though he wasn't)
> > > > > > ;-)
>
> > > > > He played for Spain no? And again, it wasn't my question though I'll
> > > > > take your attempts at diverting the topic as a positive reinforcement
> > > > > of what I made simple for you :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > Yes, Di Stefano played for Spain, but he wasn't Spanish. He also
> > > > played for Argentina and Columbia.
>
> > > And? What does this have to do with what I proposed. I've asked you
> > > several times now.
>
> > And I've answered several posts ago.
> > Why are you so reluctant to answer my questions when I freely answer
> > yours?
>
> Your questions have no relevancy to my proposal, but merely a feigned
> attempt at turning this on me, when in fact there's nothing to turn.
> I'm not comparing La Liga to what we've both acknowledge to be the
> EbFPL, am I? I'm not saying La Liga is better, or more moral,
> superior, or whatever? I've just said that the EPL should be aptyl
> renamed to the EbFPL because the best players, the best performers on
> the best teams are all foreign. That was it. That was all I had to say
> to get your feathers ruffelled Signor Higgs. Don't you think it's a
> bit much to over react like you have?
>
>
Where do you get this idea that we both agreed that EPL should be
renamed the EbFPL?
The only thing we agreed upon was that Barca should be renamed the
Spanish Based Foreign Players Club.
And I'm not really sure where you got the idea that my feathers are
ruffled.
I'm finding this exchange most amusing
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
Relax Higgs. I doubt you'd be able to convince anyone of that
nonsense.
EbFPL
Sad but true...your league and now your national teams strength lay in
the hands of foreigners...lol ;)
barca4...@hotmail.com
> Relax Higgs. I doubt you'd be able to convince anyone of that
> nonsense.
>
> EbFPL
>
> Sad but true...your league and now your national teams strength lay in
> the hands of foreigners...lol ;)
Lets explore 4 of the top teams in the EbFPL:
F=Foreigner
D=Domestic
Arsenal:
Almunia (F)
Clichy (F)
Eboue (F)
Toure (F)
Gallas (F)
Sagna (F)
Fabregas (F)
Flamini (F)
Gilberto (F)
Hleb (F)
Rosicky (F)
Adebayor (F)
Van Persie (F)
Bendtner (F)
14 of 14 players fielded for Arsenal are FOREIGN to the EPL for a 100%
FOREIGNER showing
Chelsea:
Cech (F)
Cole (D)
Ferreira (F)
Terry (D)
Ben Haim (F)
Alex (F)
Cole J (D)
Lampard (D)
Makelele (F)
Wright-Phillips (D)
Mikel (F)
Kalou (F)
Shevchenko (F)
Pizarro (F)
9 of 14 players fielded for Chelsea are FOREIGN for a 64% FOREIGNER
showing.
Liverpool:
:
Reina (F)
Arbeloa (F)
Carragher (D)
Hyypia (F)
Riise (F)
Mascherano (F)
Gerrard (D)
Kewell (F)
Benayoun (F)
Babel (F)
Crouch (D)
Kuyt (F)
Torres (F)
10 of 13 players fielded for Liverpool are FOREIGN for a 77% FOREIGNER
showing!!!
Man. United:
Van der Sar (F)
Brown (D)
Evra (F)
Ferdinand (D)
Vidic (F)
Ronaldo (F)
O'Shea (F)
Carrick (D)
Giggs (F)
Hargreaves (F)
Anderson (F)
Rooney (D)
Tevez (F)
9 of 13 players fielded for Manchester United are FOREIGN for a 69%
FOREIGNER showing
So a total of all four teams shows 42 of 54 players are FOREIGN for a
78% FOREIGNER SHOWING!!! That's pretty significant, there's no arguing
that.
Each of these teams are well over 60% FOREIGN. For the mathematically
challenged amongst us that is MORE THAN HALF!!
These are the teams that consistently go far in the Champions League
and that was the basis for the original author proclaiming that the
EPL was the best. Therefore the question posed is an accurate and
reasonable question given that the bulk of players on the best EPL
teams are Foreign I propose that the EPL change it's name to the
EbFPL
English-based
Foreigners
Premier
League
Higgs, your call...are you going to try and change the subject by
focusing on Barca, because my name has Barca in the title? You know
that doing so is just shooting yourself in the foot, then putting that
foot in your mouth right? Why? Because you deny that the EPL should be
aptly renamed while shamelessly arguing that Barca should be renamed.
Of course you did this in response to my initial proposal to rename
the EPL to the EbFPL which shows quite clearly that you are annoyed
with an accurate observation and attempted a rather weak counterplay.
The problem is that you didn't realize that in proclaiming that Barca
a team of foreigners based on the same evaluation you must accept that
the EPL should be the EbFPL. You silly man, you didn't think your rant
through.
Regardless of whether or not Barca is in the same situation or not, I
remain steadfast that the EPL's strength is based on foreigners, as
the head of their national team is also now foreign controlled. On
that basis I, once again, propose that the EPL be renamed the EbFPL
Any objections?
Jellore
Seems to me that the only one here who is annoyed is you, because of
the commercial and global success of the EPL. So much so in fact that
you while away thinking of ways to stick the knife in.
Ian
So it turns out you hate English football and the claim that we hate
Italy and other countries is mere projection. At least it's cleared
that up.
kenh...@hotmail.com
>
And the amusing thing is that poor old Barca said that no-one would be
convinced that he had his knickers in a knot over this thread, yet so
far, for the mathematically challenged, 100% of respondents have
agreed that Barca is the one who is annoyed!
Lol!
And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
have been for decades), but the fact remains that currently the EPL is
the strongest league around.
I also found particularly amusing his rather weak attempt to gloss
this over and change the subject when I mentioned that Barca, the team
he allegedly follows, has risen to success on the back of continued
foreign imports over the past 50 years
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
Ian wrote:
> On 14 Dec, 23:54, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Jellore wrote:
> > > Last year\'s CL\'s results were not a blip. Looking at this year\'s Group
> > > stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> > > in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> > > for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> > > to the last 8.
> >
> > Dont you think it would be apt to rename the league to the English-
> > based-Foreigners Premier League, or EbFPL in short?
>
> So it turns out you hate English football and the claim that we hate
> Italy and other countries is mere projection. At least it's cleared
> that up.
I take it that you don't like my idea?
barca4...@hotmail.com
I have no commercially vested interests, so the EPL's commercial
success matters very little to me, sorry to say.
Stick the knife in what? The EbFPL's success? Now how the hell could I
do that by posting to a newsgroup such as this? Do you live on the
same planet as me.
Look, you're annoyed that I'm right. It's obvious.
barca4...@hotmail.com
100% of English fans assume I'm annoyed. Like I said, you can make up
all the biographical details that you want, but the sad fact (for you
and your fellow EbFPL fans) is that you know
I am right. Your top four teams are a wopping 78% foreign fuelled. The
massive attempts you've
made to libel me, insult me, divert attention from the facts that I
present, and even turn the table on me by citing that Barcelona is
foreign proves that you know I am right and there is very little you
can do about it.
It's like if you married a whore and some guy came around and knew
that her history included fucking the entire football team, and then
some. You could defend her honor all you want, but in the end you
know...a whore is a whore.
> And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
It's true, Spain and Italy have foreigner, just not the same quantity
as the EPL. Besides Inter, the other top 5 Italian teams have more
than 50% Italian content, ditto for Spain.
> have been for decades), but the fact remains that currently the EPL is
> the strongest league around.
Incorrect as well. According to UEFA's coefficients it's La Liga who
is the strongest, and it is Serie A who won the CL last year. You have
neither trophy nor the co-efficient on your side. If you want to make
it into a revenue argument, however, then you are right. EPL brings in
the most money. Wow. Great!!
> I also found particularly amusing his rather weak attempt to gloss
> this over and change the subject when I mentioned that Barca, the team
> he allegedly follows, has risen to success on the back of continued
> foreign imports over the past 50 years
What's there to discuss? You merely mention that to gloss over and
change the subject that the EbFPL is primarily foreign. It was a
rather weak attempt in and of itself, and has me smiling quite proudly
that I was able to dominate you so easily.
kenh...@hotmail.com
Oh have a cry, Barca, you said individual.
You're just upset thatI've demolished your arguments so
comprehensively.
> It's like if you married a whore and some guy came around and knew
> that her history included fucking the entire football team, and then
> some. You could defend her honor all you want, but in the end you
> know...a whore is a whore.
>
> > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
>
> It's true, Spain and Italy have foreigner, just not the same quantity
> as the EPL. Besides Inter, the other top 5 Italian teams have more
> than 50% Italian content, ditto for Spain.
>
So you agree that they have foreign content.
> > have been for decades), but the fact remains that currently the EPL is
> > the strongest league around.
>
> Incorrect as well. According to UEFA's coefficients it's La Liga who
> is the strongest, and it is Serie A who won the CL last year. You have
> neither trophy nor the co-efficient on your side. If you want to make
> it into a revenue argument, however, then you are right. EPL brings in
> the most money. Wow. Great!!
>
If you base your stats on who won the EC!, then it's a title that has
changed hands every year this century
> > I also found particularly amusing his rather weak attempt to gloss
> > this over and change the subject when I mentioned that Barca, the team
> > he allegedly follows, has risen to success on the back of continued
> > foreign imports over the past 50 years
>
> What's there to discuss? You merely mention that to gloss over and
> change the subject that the EbFPL is primarily foreign. It was a
> rather weak attempt in and of itself, and has me smiling quite proudly
> that I was able to dominate you so easily.- Hide quoted text -
>
I didn't deny that the EPL has a high foreign content, I simply
pointed out that other leagues like Spain & Italy have also.
Your mistake was to try to deny this
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
Are you ok? What argument have you demolished? That the top four teams
in the EPL are 78% foreign? lol...nice try...
> > It's like if you married a whore and some guy came around and knew
> > that her history included fucking the entire football team, and then
> > some. You could defend her honor all you want, but in the end you
> > know...a whore is a whore.
> >
> > > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> >
> > It's true, Spain and Italy have foreigner, just not the same quantity
> > as the EPL. Besides Inter, the other top 5 Italian teams have more
> > than 50% Italian content, ditto for Spain.
> So you agree that they have foreign content.
When have I denied it, unlike yourself? I am actually amused at the
great lengths you've gone to divert from the fact that the top 4 EPL
teams are 78% foreign, thereby my suggestion to rename the league to
the EbFPL is not only a reasonable one, but a supported one.
> > > have been for decades), but the fact remains that currently the EPL is
> > > the strongest league around.
> >
> > Incorrect as well. According to UEFA's coefficients it's La Liga who
> > is the strongest, and it is Serie A who won the CL last year. You have
> > neither trophy nor the co-efficient on your side. If you want to make
> > it into a revenue argument, however, then you are right. EPL brings in
> > the most money. Wow. Great!!
> If you base your stats on who won the EC!,
Can you read? What stats have I presented? I've presented two standard
by which to judge a league by. One is by the UEFA's coefficients, and
their coefficients state that La Liga is the stongest league around,
so you are wrong in stating that it is the EPL. The other one is a
standard that many fans cite, not that I fully agree with it, but just
in case you were one of these
idiot fans and you do appear to be, I mentioned it.
On either count, the EPL is not on top. Now what evidence will you
present to support your proposition that the EPL is the strongest
league? I expect you to ignore this and attack my character again,
thereby proving me right once more. Your move.
> > > I also found particularly amusing his rather weak attempt to gloss
> > > this over and change the subject when I mentioned that Barca, the team
> > > he allegedly follows, has risen to success on the back of continued
> > > foreign imports over the past 50 years
> >
> > What's there to discuss? You merely mention that to gloss over and
> > change the subject that the EbFPL is primarily foreign. It was a
> > rather weak attempt in and of itself, and has me smiling quite proudly
> > that I was able to dominate you so easily.- Hide quoted text -
> >
>
> I didn't deny that the EPL has a high foreign content, I simply
> pointed out that other leagues like Spain & Italy have also.
> Your mistake was to try to deny this
I never denied anything, you're imagining things. I said that the
EbFPL has more foreigners and the top teams in the EbFPL are more than
50% foreign, which aside from Inter in the Serie A, is not entirely
true about Spanish and Italian teams. You are shamelessly trying to
deny this by making it about me, or Barcelona just because my username
has Barca in it. That was predictable.
barca4...@hotmail.com
Jellore wrote:
> Last year's CL's results were not a blip. Looking at this year's Group
> stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> to the last 8.
Foiled again Jellore:
UEFA's coefficients for 2007/08
1 Spain 71.266
2 England 68.499
Espana` is still the stongest. Don't tell Higgs, he'll say it isn't
true ;)
Ian
The word idea is too strong for a pathetic piece of trolling.
Ian
That doesn't include current results though does it?
Benny
> From : kenh...@hotmail.com
> And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> have been for decades),
Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
barca4...@hotmail.com
You can read right? You see 2007/08 in the heading up there? ;)
Ian
Indeed, outdated figures.
barca4...@hotmail.com
Higgs, where are you higgs? Care to respond? Don't forget to mention
Di Stefano and Puskas again in your whinge again too, ok?
barca4...@hotmail.com
Right because 2007/08 already passed several seasons back.
alka...@hotmail.com
> > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
>
> > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> > have been for decades),
>
> Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
developed a foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's
success internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie
A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
peak. So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
player markets are countries like Holland and Portugal which are
international powers yet have a financially small league. This
effectively means that they produce excellent players who they ship
out to the big leagues to get even better while at the same time
creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of course
this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain.
Italy somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something
right. (or be very lucky!)
Ian
Does it include the latest results. No.
Is it therefore up to date. No.
There is no optical illusion here.
It's for the 2007/2008 season, not based on it.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
barca4...@hotmail.com
alkami...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 17, 11:50 am, Benny <Be...@soccer-europe.com> wrote:
> > > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
> > > From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
> >
> > > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> > > have been for decades),
> >
> > Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> > nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> > Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
>
> This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
> in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
> country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
> developed a foreigner addiction).
Overall that might have been true, but you can go back and look at the
archives and see it wasn't until Inter in the last 2-3 seasons that
any team in Italy comprised of more than 50% foreigner. This is the
case for the big four in England. These are facts that are undeniable.
>But this has never hindered Italy's
> success internationally.
No, but it helped the foreigners that were there to upgrade their own
game. Do you think this is happening to the foreigners in your league?
> In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie
> A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
> peak.
You do know there was a foreigner ban in Italy from 1966 till 1980,
right?
>So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
Italy is unique I suppose. But then again so is England. The
difference in class between the two is obvious as well. I don't know
that having more foreigners in a league actually improves or hinders
the leagues national team though. I mean in your case it's done
neither, you are still the same old blimey that you were in the 80's
and 90's and Italy is still competitive as they were in the 80's, 90's
and this decade.
> What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
> player markets are countries like Holland and Portugal which are
> international powers yet have a financially small league. This
> effectively means that they produce excellent players who they ship
> out to the big leagues to get even better while at the same time
> creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of course
> this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
> losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain.
> Italy somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something
> right. (or be very lucky!)
Italian tactics have modernized the game, since about the mid 90's
this has been true. The tactics and technical players help to make
their team internationally strong.
barca4...@hotmail.com
Ian wrote:
> On 17 Dec, 20:36, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Ian wrote:
> > > On 17 Dec, 20:34, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > Ian wrote:
> > > > > On 17 Dec, 13:20, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > Jellore wrote:
> > > > > > > Last year's CL's results were not a blip. Looking at this year's Group
> > > > > > > stage results it is clear that the EPL is the strongest domestic comp
> > > > > > > in Europe. It is the only League where all four clubs have qualified
> > > > > > > for the knockout stages, and all good favourites to progress through
> > > > > > > to the last 8.
> >
> > > > > > Foiled again Jellore:
> >
> > > > > > UEFA's coefficients for 2007/08
> > > > > > 1 Spain 71.266
> > > > > > 2 England 68.499
> >
> > > > > > Espana` is still the stongest. Don't tell Higgs, he'll say it isn't
> > > > > > true ;)
> >
> > > > > That doesn't include current results though does it?
> >
> > > > You can read right? You see 2007/08 in the heading up there? ;)
> >
> > > Indeed, outdated figures.
> >
> > Right because 2007/08 already passed several seasons back
>
> Does it include the latest results. No.
Uhm yes
> Is it therefore up to date. No.
Uhm most definitely
> There is no optical illusion here.
Right, you are as daft as you come across.
> It's for the 2007/2008 season, not based on it.
> Are you being deliberately obtuse?
No, but you are talking out of your arse again.
Here you go you tosser:
# country 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 rank08 nt08
1 Spain 14.312 12.437 15.642 19.000 9.875 71.266 6/ 8
2 England 11.250 15.571 14.428 16.625 10.625 68.499 7/ 8
03/04 Spain 14.312 > England 11.250
04/05 Spain 12.437 < England 15.571
05/06 Spain 15.642 > England 14.428
06/07 Spain 19.000 > England 16.625 (just last year, is this ok? ;) )
07/08 Spain 9.875 < England 10.625 (marginally greater)
So let me guess, half way through the season Englands marginal
increase over Spain makes them the stronger league overall right? The
past 5 years makes no difference whatsoever. I suppose you propose
that Fifa's ranking system should also be based on bi-yearly results
right? Italy isn't the current World Champion and Greece isn't the
current Euro champion. Not only that, but we can erase all the World
Cups that Italy, Brazil, France, Argentina, Germany and Uruguay have
won in the past, because past history is moot. Of course, we can't
erase the precious 1966 World Cup because England is England and can
do no wrong.
alka...@lycos.com
> alkami...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 11:50 am, Benny <Be...@soccer-europe.com> wrote:
> > > > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
> > > > From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
>
> > > > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > > > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> > > > have been for decades),
>
> > > Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> > > nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> > > Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
>
> > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
> > in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
> > country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
> > developed a foreigner addiction).
>
> Overall that might have been true, but you can go back and look at the
> archives and see it wasn't until Inter in the last 2-3 seasons that
> any team in Italy comprised of more than 50% foreigner. This is the
> case for the big four in England. These are facts that are undeniable.
The problem with the EPL is that there are way too many *average*
foreign players. Far more than in Italy and Spain.
>
> >But this has never hindered Italy's
> > success internationally.
>
> No, but it helped the foreigners that were there to upgrade their own
> game. Do you think this is happening to the foreigners in your league?
My league is the Chicago indoor soccer league. I dont really know
whats happening to the foreigners in my league and the media dont
really care either because we're a bunch of washed-up recreational
players. But if you are referring to the EPL then I dont think there's
any distinct pattern with in any direction with the foreigners. You
have the Henrys, Vieiras, and Drogbas and then you have the
Shevchenkos and Morientes'. The same is true for Italy. Players either
adapt to a league or they dont. There are no guarantees of success or
failure in the transfer market in any country. And there are
definitely no guarantees that you will improve if you go to a certain
league.
>
> > In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie
> > A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
> > peak.
>
> You do know there was a foreigner ban in Italy from 1966 till 1980,
> right?
Actually I did not know that since I didnt get into the game until
about 1982. The point however still stands, that in the 80s Italy was
the prime importer of foreign players while having a very successful
national side.
>
> >So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
>
> Italy is unique I suppose. But then again so is England. The
> difference in class between the two is obvious as well. I don't know
> that having more foreigners in a league actually improves or hinders
> the leagues national team though. I mean in your case it's done
> neither, you are still the same old blimey that you were in the 80's
> and 90's and Italy is still competitive as they were in the 80's, 90's
> and this decade.
It's not fair to compare the Chicago indoor soccer league to Serie A.
>
> > What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
> > player markets are countries like Holland and Portugal which are
> > international powers yet have a financially small league. This
> > effectively means that they produce excellent players who they ship
> > out to the big leagues to get even better while at the same time
> > creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of course
> > this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
> > losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain.
> > Italy somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something
> > right. (or be very lucky!)
>
> Italian tactics have modernized the game, since about the mid 90's
> this has been true. The tactics and technical players help to make
> their team internationally strong.-
I agree. They seem to have footballing discipline instilled into them
at a very young age, something the English definitely lack.
kenh...@hotmail.com
> Benny wrote:
> > > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
>
> > > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> > > have been for decades),
>
> > Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> > nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> > Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
>
> > http://soccer-europe.com
> > Rss feed :http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
>
> Higgs, where are you higgs? Care to respond? Don't forget to mention
> Di Stefano and Puskas again in your whinge again too, ok?
Barca, you raving idiot, no-one is saying there are no foreigners in
EPL, Benny is simply pointing out that there are more foreigners in
EPL than in Serie A or La Liga. At least at the moment. Historically,
Serie A and LL have always had a lot of foreign players.
I'm not sure what spin you want to put on that. Spain has won sfa as a
national team and Italy has won plenty.
Does that mean it is better or worse to have plenty of foreign
players?
I don't think it's persuasive either way
Higgs
Where are you Barca, you little whinger?
kenh...@hotmail.com
The reason you didn't know that is because it simply isn't true.
Don't believe a word that lying little turd says.
A quick look at teams like the EC1 winners Milan of 69 shows one
German defender Karl-Heinz Schnellinger and the fearsome forward Kurt
Hamrin (a veteran of the 1958 Swedish World Cup team).
But why not compare apples with oranges.?
What was the proportion of foreign based players in the EPL in the
same period?
Higgs
Ian
As I said elsewhere, goodbye. I hope you get over your inferiority
complex at some time in the near future. You'll probably find it
liberating.
kenh...@hotmail.com
I've never denied the EPL has a high % of foreign players,
I simply demolished your theory that Serie A and LL has never gone
down this path.
They've been doing it for 50 years or more.
Higgs
kenh...@hotmail.com
>
Well, seeing as the debate is about which league is the stronger at
this moment in time, current rankings would have quite a lot of
bearing on that.
Putting forward a bunch of historical results as to when LL was
considered stronger and ignoring the current ranking seems a pretty
silly way of doing it.
How about putting forward rankings from the early 70s when Ajax &
Feyenoord were EC1 champs and then claiming the Dutch League is
currently the strongest?
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
alkami...@lycos.com wrote:
> On Dec 17, 11:25 pm, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > alkami...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Dec 17, 11:50 am, Benny <Be...@soccer-europe.com> wrote:
> > > > > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
> > > > > From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
> >
> > > > > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > > > > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> > > > > have been for decades),
> >
> > > > Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> > > > nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> > > > Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
> >
> > > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
> > > in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
> > > country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
> > > developed a foreigner addiction).
> >
> > Overall that might have been true, but you can go back and look at the
> > archives and see it wasn't until Inter in the last 2-3 seasons that
> > any team in Italy comprised of more than 50% foreigner. This is the
> > case for the big four in England. These are facts that are undeniable.
> > >But this has never hindered Italy's
> > > success internationally.
> > No, but it helped the foreigners that were there to upgrade their own
> > game. Do you think this is happening to the foreigners in your league?
> I dont think there's
> any distinct pattern with in any direction with the foreigners. You
> have the Henrys, Vieiras, and Drogbas and then you have the
> Shevchenkos and Morientes'. The same is true for Italy. Players either
> adapt to a league or they dont.
The style of game played in the league either helps refine and improve
the players ability or it doesn't. I think La Liga and Serie A are the
former.
> > >So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
> >
> > Italy is unique I suppose. But then again so is England. The
> > difference in class between the two is obvious as well. I don't know
> > that having more foreigners in a league actually improves or hinders
> > the leagues national team though. I mean in your case it's done
> > neither, you are still the same old blimey that you were in the 80's
> > and 90's and Italy is still competitive as they were in the 80's, 90's
> > and this decade.
> > > What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
barca4...@hotmail.com
kenhig...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 18, 7:35 am, barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Benny wrote:
> > > > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
> > > > From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
> >
> > > > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> > > > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> > > > have been for decades),
> >
> > > Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> > > nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> > > Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
> >
> > > http://soccer-europe.com
> > > Rss feed :http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
> >
> > Higgs, where are you higgs? Care to respond? Don't forget to mention
> > Di Stefano and Puskas again in your whinge again too, ok?
>
> Barca, you raving idiot,
Name calling isn't going to prove me wrong Higgs.
>no-one is saying there are no foreigners in
> EPL, Benny is simply pointing out that there are more foreigners in
> EPL than in Serie A or La Liga.
That's what I've been saying for several days now, and you've been
arguing against. I didn't know English was your second language too.
>At least at the moment. Historically,
> Serie A and LL have always had a lot of foreign players.
Englands top four teams have 78% foreign content. Neither Italy's or
Spain's top four teams are collectively more than 50%. Get it?
EbFPL....
barca4...@hotmail.com
> The reason you didn't know that is because it simply isn't true.Don't believe a word that lying >
> little turd says.
You further reveal how stupid you are.
"In 1966, all foreigners were banned from the Italian League. Their
presence was blamed for the contued underperfomance of the national
side, culminating at the humiliating defeat by North Korea at that
year's World Cup[8]. The ban was eased when one foreigner per Serie A
team was allowed from 1980[9]." - third paragraph under the section
entitled 'Italian Oriundi'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriundo
You continue to prove your football knowledge is as rich as the
backside of a cereal box. Higgs, you are clearly ignorant.
You can try to censor me by labelling me a troll, or saying I'm a
liar, but everything I've presented so far is accurate, unlike
anything you have said.
> A quick look at teams like the EC1 winners Milan of 69
That's the problem with you, you take "quick looks" rather than making
yourself fully aware. It's probably gotten you into a lot of troubles
in your life, and makes you a puppet for what the media tells you.
Your knowledge is ineffectual and unsatisfactory.
> But why not compare apples with oranges.?
> What was the proportion of foreign based players in the EPL in the
> same period?
Why don't you do some research, turd? If there was no ban in the EPL
from 1966 - 1980 as there was in the Italian Serie A, then it was
probably higher.
Go look it up this time before opening your mouth...turd... :))
> Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
I have nothing to be inferior about, but as I earlier predicted...when
your ad hominem approach
proves to be a failure you would run with your tail between your legs.
You simply have no answer to the facts that I present and therefore
turning this into a name calling game was your best angle. I must say
that I'm a little disappointed Ian. I did figure that you wouldn't
cowardly fold so easily, but I suppose when you can't handle the truth
that is what happens.
barca4...@hotmail.com
Excellent, then you can no longer deny that if 78% of your top teams
(the ones that compete in the CL most notably) have 78% foreign
content, then the league should aptly be renamed to the
EbFPL
England-based
Foreigners
Premier
League
Even the coaches are foreign, lol!!
> I simply demolished your theory that Serie A and LL has never gone
> down this path.
This is your theory since I've never even brought the Serie A and LL
into the question. It was your feeble attempt. As I said, Higgsy,
trying to put words in my mouth is a failing endeavour, as is your
soccer knowledge in general. You've been ripped to shreds on any topic
you've tried to debate me on. You are my bitch so far.
barca4...@hotmail.com
Boy oh boy are you ever daft. Those are the current ranking you twat.
They are called the UEFA coefficients. Maybe you should do a bit of a
google search before opening your mouth anymore. So far, all you've
done is reveal what a clueless retard you are. Denying that the EPL
has more foreigners than La Liga and Serie A. Unaware of the foreigner
ban in the Serie A from 1966-1980, and this.... amongst others that I
can't be bothered to remember at the moment.
> Putting forward a bunch of historical results as to when LL was
> considered stronger and ignoring the current ranking seems a pretty
> silly way of doing it.
Tell that to UEFA you wanker...
http://www.xs4all.nl/~kassiesa/bert/uefa/data/method3/crank2008.html
> How about putting forward rankings from the early 70s when Ajax &
> Feyenoord were EC1 champs and then claiming the Dutch League is
> currently the strongest?
This is the problem with you Higgs. Whenever someone make a factual
observation within a certain time period you always attempt to change
the discussion to something irrelevant as if to prove an opposite
exists, when in fact it only proves how utterly hopeless you really
are.
> Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
Should read:
"if 78% of your top teams players are foreign, the the league should
aprtly be renamed..."
I figured you would need me to make this clear, Higgs, since your
reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired you'd probably get
stuck on this typographical error of mine and try to make an issue out
of it.
kenh...@hotmail.com
I know that you're a moron and I've proved you a liar several times
now.
If foerigners were banned from Italian football, how do you explain
the presence of the likes of Schnellinger & Kurt
Hamrin in the 69 Milan side?
Were they made honorary Italians or something?
> > A quick look at teams like the EC1 winners Milan of 69
>
> That's the problem with you, you take "quick looks" rather than making
> yourself fully aware. It's probably gotten you into a lot of troubles
> in your life, and makes you a puppet for what the media tells you.
> Your knowledge is ineffectual and unsatisfactory.
>
If you look at the websites of both clubs, you'll find a section on
famous former players and the years they played.
The three I named certainly played in Italy after 1966
> > But why not compare apples with oranges.?
> > What was the proportion of foreign based players in the EPL in the
> > same period?
>
> Why don't you do some research, turd? If there was no ban in the EPL
> from 1966 - 1980 as there was in the Italian Serie A, then it was
> probably higher.
>
oh this is laughable.
There was the odd 'foreigner' in EPL in the 70s, people like Clyde
Best of Bermuda, the odd Australian, some lesser known names from
sundry countries. Very few, if any, famous names. There wasn't the
money then.
Players like Cruyff went to Spain, Platini to Italy. Maradona to both.
It wasn't until Ardilles & Villa came to Tottenham in the late 70s
that EPL had seen any foreigners of real class.
Since then, the number has increased, but it's only in the past 10
years that it's made any real impact.
So, the fact is you're a lying, ignorant moron.
All you do is look a few things up on Wikipedia (and then get things
wrong anyway)
Higgs
> Go look it up this time before opening your mouth...turd... :))
>
>
>
> > Higgs- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Benny
> This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only in
> comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the country
> with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England developed a
> foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's success
> internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie A's dominance
> of the international talent pool was arguably near its peak.
It is not very debatable at all. Pre Bosman Italian clubs could only play with
three foreigners, the same as most of the leagues in fact. On average 30% of
players in Serie A squads are foreigners and that includes foreigners with
Italian citizenship, in Spain it's 38%, France 34%, The Netherlands 39% and
England 59%. This is based on data over the past 3 years and without checking
I'm almost certain the EPL replacing Serie A as the richest league had very
little effect on the foreign player levels in Italy. Italian clubs will
generally have a strong core of Italian players.
> So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory. What is certain here is
> that the biggest beneficiaries of the global player markets are countries
> like Holland and Portugal which are international powers yet have a
> financially small league. This effectively means that they produce excellent
> players who they ship out to the big leagues to get even better while at the
> same time creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of
> course this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
> losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain. Italy
> somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something right. (or be
> very lucky!)
The best coaches and tacticians in the world coupled with traditional strong
defences, fantasistas, strikers and players who will die for the shirt. That's
the 'secret'.
barca4...@hotmail.com
I haven't lied on anything. Just because you didn't know there was a
foreigner ban in Italy from 1966-1980 doesn't mean I was lying about
it. In fact, it proves you were the moron. I've also not lied about
Italy not playing catennacio in the late 90's and early 2000's.
You should be embarrassed that the only way you think you could defeat
my arguments is by making up lies about me, then accusing me of lying.
How sad.
> If foerigners were banned from Italian football, how do you explain
> the presence of the likes of Schnellinger & Kurt
> Hamrin in the 69 Milan side?
Look, I'm not arguing with you. If you had half a brain you could
research it yourself and find out there was a foreign player ban
implemented from 1966 - 1990. Perhaps the ban allowed for foreigners
who were already on the teams to stay but no new ones to come, I am
not entirely sure, I do know that this was implemented in 1966. If you
don't believe me, then go out and find a source that will confirm it,
otherwise calling me a liar for something you clearly are ignorant on
only makes you look like the fool that you are.
This is not the point though is it Higgs? I mean, ever since I said
that the EPL should be renamed to the EbFPL you've been trying to find
anything to malign me with, and judging by your feeble attempts I can
quite accurately say that I own you.
> > > A quick look at teams like the EC1 winners Milan of 69
> >
> > That's the problem with you, you take "quick looks" rather than making
> > yourself fully aware. It's probably gotten you into a lot of troubles
> > in your life, and makes you a puppet for what the media tells you.
> > Your knowledge is ineffectual and unsatisfactory.
> If you look at the websites of both clubs, you'll find a section on
> famous former players and the years they played.
> The three I named certainly played in Italy after 1966
Why have you cut out the wikipedia reference that confirms there was a
foreign player ban from 1966-1980?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriundo
I mean, for crying out loud you didn't even know that UEFA bases it's
domestic league strength on a five year window. You thought I made
those years up, and as laughable as Ian you thought they didn't
represent the current year. You guys are major wankers.
> > > But why not compare apples with oranges.?
> > > What was the proportion of foreign based players in the EPL in the
> > > same period?
> >
> > Why don't you do some research, turd? If there was no ban in the EPL
> > from 1966 - 1980 as there was in the Italian Serie A, then it was
> > probably higher.
> >
>
> oh this is laughable.
> There was the odd 'foreigner' in EPL in the 70s, people like Clyde
> Best of Bermuda, the odd Australian, some lesser known names from
> sundry countries. Very few, if any, famous names. There wasn't the
> money then.
Why is it laughable? You asked me what the proportion of foreign based
players in the EPL
was in the same period and I said I didn't know. That's something you
should look up for yourself. It's irrelevant anyhow because the
original message was that regardless of a foreign player ban in Italy,
the Italians were successful in 1982 when they were coming off a 14
year period where there were no foreigners allowed in the league and
in 2006 when there was a growing content of foreigners in the league
for about 11 years, probably peaking in 2000.
That said, it doesn't remove from the fact that the biggest clubs in
England are a collective 78% foreign. No matter how hard you try:
- Citing that Italy uses catennacio in the 90's and 2000's
- Denying that there was a foreigner ban in the Serie A from 1966-1980
- Being unaware of UEFA's coefficients
- Citing that Barcelona has a history of bringing in foreigners
- Citing that Puskas and Di Stefan were a major part of Reals success
in the 60's
no matter how many slanted arguments you try to introduce, it will
never detract from the fact that the EPL's strength is based on
foreigners, and that's something you simply cannot hack, to the point
where you lie in calling me a liar because you just can't beat me in
any other form.
Therefore, all evidence in...I own you :)
> So, the fact is you're a lying, ignorant moron.
What have I lied about?
Ignorant? Laughable....you are the one who believes that Italy uses
catennacio, unaware of UEFA's coefficient system, and call me a liar
for stating that there was indeed a foreigner ban from 1966-1980.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriundo
The ignorant one is you, as is the liar.
I own you :))
> All you do is look a few things up on Wikipedia (and then get things
> wrong anyway)
You just don't know better...but when you find a source that confirms
the foreigner ban in Serie A, you're going to wish you kept your mouth
shut.
I also still await for your evidence that Italy used catennacio post
1970, or even a glimmer of what catennacio truly is. Next you're going
to tell us that I made up UEFA's coefficient system too. LOL...tool
barca4...@hotmail.com
Benny wrote:
> > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
> > From : alka...@hotmail.com
>
> > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only in
> > comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the country
> > with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England developed a
> > foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's success
> > internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie A's dominance
> > of the international talent pool was arguably near its peak.
>
> It is not very debatable at all. Pre Bosman Italian clubs could only play with
> three foreigners, the same as most of the leagues in fact. On average 30% of
> players in Serie A squads are foreigners and that includes foreigners with
> Italian citizenship, in Spain it's 38%, France 34%, The Netherlands 39% and
> England 59%.
:))))))))
More in support of a name change. Higgs...breathe Higgs, breathe....
barca4...@hotmail.com
alkami:
> > > > > > > Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> > > > > > > nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> > > > > > > Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
Barca:
> > > > > Overall that might have been true, but you can go back and look at the
> > > > > archives and see it wasn't until Inter in the last 2-3 seasons that
> > > > > any team in Italy comprised of more than 50% foreigner. This is the
> > > > > case for the big four in England. These are facts that are undeniable.
Alkami:
> > > > > > In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie
> > > > > > A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
> > > > > > peak.
Barca:
> > > > > You do know there was a foreigner ban in Italy from 1966 till 1980,
> > > > > right?
Alkami:
> > > > Actually I did not know that since I didnt get into the game until
> > > > about 1982. The point however still stands, that in the 80s Italy was
> > > > the prime importer of foreign players while having a very successful
> > > > national side.
Higgs (dumbass):
> > > The reason you didn't know that is because it simply isn't true.Don't believe a word that
> > > lying little turd says.
Barca:
> > You further reveal how stupid you are. I do not lie
> > "In 1966, all foreigners were banned from the Italian League. Their
> > presence was blamed for the contued underperfomance of the national
> > side, culminating at the humiliating defeat by North Korea at that
> > year's World Cup[8]. The ban was eased when one foreigner per Serie A
> > team was allowed from 1980[9]." - third paragraph under the section
> > entitled 'Italian Oriundi'
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriundo
> > You continue to prove your football knowledge is as rich as the
> > backside of a cereal box. Higgs, you are clearly ignorant.
> I know that you're a moron and I've proved you a liar several times now.
On what, care to be specific?
Higgs:
> > > A quick look at teams like the EC1 winners Milan of 69
Higgs:
> All you do is look a few things up on Wikipedia (and then get things
> wrong anyway)
A "quick look" then "all you do is look up a few things"
Sounds like you've described yourself perfectly Higgsy.
http://www.channel4.com/sport/football_italia/articles/chinagliagg.html
"Following Italy's 1966 World Cup debacle there was an outright ban on
signing foreign players. The clubs had to buy Italian, which meant
scouring the lower Divisions. Chinaglia, blessed with an impressive
physique, had scored 25 goals in two seasons in Naples. Naturally, he
became a target. It was Lazio who swooped first, signing him for
£140,000 and it was the best money the club ever spent."
It appears I was right again and following the ban in 1966 as stated
above, there was an outright ban on signing foreign players. This
seems to imply that those already signed could stay.
Here is a list of foreigners in Italy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_Serie_A_players
Try to find any new ones after 1966 that weren't already there (the 3
or 5 that remained till 1972).
Oh and guess what Higgs? No matter how many different ways you attempt
to divert the topic from EPL being a foreigner dominated and fuelled
league, you simply will fail. You can no longer deny this and keep any
shred of integrity that you haven't been stripped of yet.
Go ahead call me a liar again, see if it does you any good :)
Higgs:
> So, the fact is you're a lying, ignorant moron.
Pot...kettle...black... moron :)) I own you Higgs.
barca4...@hotmail.com
barca4eve...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > You do know there was a foreigner ban in Italy from 1966 till 1980,
> > > > > > right?
Alkami:
> > > > > Actually I did not know that since I didnt get into the game until
> > > > > about 1982. The point however still stands, that in the 80s Italy was
> > > > > the prime importer of foreign players while having a very successful
> > > > > national side.
> Higgs (dumbass):
> > > > The reason you didn't know that is because it simply isn't true.Don't believe a word that
> > > > lying little turd says.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriundo
http://www.planetworldcup.com/GUESTS/matt20040222.html
http://www.channel4.com/sport/football_italia/articles/chinagliagg.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_Serie_A_players
"Italian clubs were banned from having foreign players following a
poor showing in the 1966 World Cup although this was rescinded at the
start of the 1980-81 season to one foreign player per squad." - see
reuters article below :))
Higgs:
> > > > A quick look at teams like the EC1 winners Milan of 69
> Higgs:
> > All you do is look a few things up on Wikipedia (and then get things
> > wrong anyway)
:)))
==============================================
Tuesday, March 5, 2002
Cut imports, Italian clubs urged
ROME, March 4 (Reuters) - Italian clubs have been urged to reduce
their contingent of foreign players by the Italian Footballers
Association (AIC) - a suggestion which has also been made by national
coach Giovanni Trapattoni.
The majority of Serie A and Serie B teams have large numbers of
foreign players and there is no ban on the amount of non-EU players
they can field following legislation last year.
"At a time when Italian clubs want to reduce the size of their squads
to 25," said AIC president Sergio Campana, quoted by Italian news
agency ANSA, "it our idea is that six players in each team should be
Italian and we think that two thirds of registered players should be
Italian."
There are 341 foreign footballers in Serie A and B this season,
compared to 66 during the 1995-96 season - the year of the Bosman
ruling - and Campana wants to introduce a quota of Italian players in
each team.
The data, supplied by AIC, at a meeting in Milan on Monday underlines
the massive rise in foreign players in Italy.
"We must know the wishes of clubs but we already know the principal
arguments will be flexibility with the compensation to reach sporting
objectives," Campana added.
"The presence of non-EU players from the youth teams to trainees is
dramatic. There are teams in which the presence of Italians is a
minority."
Italian clubs were banned from having foreign players following a poor
showing in the 1966 World Cup although this was rescinded at the start
of the 1980-81 season to one foreign player per squad.
Italy coach Trapattoni has also suggested a reduction in the number of
foreign players in a bid to make the national team more competitive.
Torino fielded an all-Italian side when they drew with Juventus last
weekend and Piacenza had a policy of fielding just Italians when they
were in Serie A two seasons ago, although the club were relegated.
====================
how's that foot tasting higgs?
barca4...@hotmail.com
> > > > Actually I did not know that since I didnt get into the game until
> > > > about 1982. The point however still stands, that in the 80s Italy was
> > > > the prime importer of foreign players while having a very successful
> > > > national side.
Well Alkami, the foreigner ban was removed in 80/81 and at that point
the teams were allowed only 1 import. This was the case for several
years, so to imply that the Italian national team was successful
because of foreigners, during a period of time where only one non-
domestic player was allowed per club is false. Since the 1966 ban on
foreigners Italy won a European Cup (1968) placed 2nd in the World Cup
(1970) and 4th (1978), then won it (1980). It's arguable that the
foreigner ban thus did the Italian national team good. That, however,
is negligible due to the win in 2006 when there was some 30% foreign
content in the Serie A. Also during the period of 1990-2006 Italy did
quite well internationally: 3rd in 1990, 2nd in 1994, and 2nd in Euro
2000.
This is also the case for England is it not? England has not been
successful during the 70's and 80's when foreign content was not as
high as it is today, with success still eluding England.
Therefore I don't think the foreign content can be a positive argument
one way or another for the successes and failures of Italy and England
respectively. It must go deeper than that.
This still doesn't add to or remove from the argument that Higgs is
desperately trying to deny, and that the EPL is foreigner
fuelled...simple as that.
MH
alka...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 17, 11:50 am, Benny <Be...@soccer-europe.com> wrote:
>
>> > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
>> > From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
>>
>> > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
>> > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
>> > have been for decades),
>>
>>Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
>>nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
>>Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
>
>
> This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
> in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
> country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
> developed a foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's
> success internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982,
This is just plain wrong, I am afraid. 1982 followed a total ban on
foreigners in Serie A which was later relaxed to 1 foreign import, (eg.
Brady on Juventus) and then to 2 starting after the 1982 world cup.
Serie
> A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
> peak.
Nobody can argue that. Serie A began to dominate the international
talent pool AFTER 1982, and it did not peak until the late 80s/early
90s, when teams were allowed three foreigners.
So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
> What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
> player markets are countries like Holland and Portugal which are
> international powers yet have a financially small league. This
> effectively means that they produce excellent players who they ship
> out to the big leagues to get even better while at the same time
> creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of course
> this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
> losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain.
> Italy somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something
> right. (or be very lucky!)
The Bundesliga has more foreigners than Spain or Italy, if I remember
correctly, and maybe even more than England (Benny ?). In spite of this
trend, Germany has been able to field decent national teams. I don't
think you can make any generalisations at all, as national team form
sometimes tracks several years behind club performance in a given league.
alka...@hotmail.com
> alkami...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 11:50 am, Benny <Be...@soccer-europe.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
> >> > From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
>
> >> > And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
> >> > in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
> >> > have been for decades),
>
> >>Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
> >>nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
> >>Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
>
> > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
> > in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
> > country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
> > developed a foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's
> > success internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982,
>
> This is just plain wrong, I am afraid. 1982 followed a total ban on
> foreigners in Serie A which was later relaxed to 1 foreign import, (eg.
> Brady on Juventus) and then to 2 starting after the 1982 world cup.
Yes, I stood corrected on that point. My first exposure to Serie A was
84/85 when it seemed that almost all of the who's who of the world
football played there. I consequently assumed that that had been the
case for a long time. The only otehr league I followed then was the
English one where the only foreigners were a couple of Argentinians at
Spurs with a few Olsen's, Molby's, and Metgod's sprinkled here and
there.
>
> Serie
>
> > A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
> > peak.
>
> Nobody can argue that. Serie A began to dominate the international
> talent pool AFTER 1982, and it did not peak until the late 80s/early
> 90s, when teams were allowed three foreigners.
Even so, here is Italy's international record in major cups in the
late 80s and 90s:
EC88 - Semifinals
WC90 - Semifinals
EC92 - Did not qualify
WC94 - Final
EC96 - Group stage
WC98 - Quaterfinals
EC00 - Final
Pretty impressive. With a lot of foreigners in their league.
>
> So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
>
> > What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
> > player markets are countries like Holland and Portugal which are
> > international powers yet have a financially small league. This
> > effectively means that they produce excellent players who they ship
> > out to the big leagues to get even better while at the same time
> > creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of course
> > this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
> > losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain.
> > Italy somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something
> > right. (or be very lucky!)
>
> The Bundesliga has more foreigners than Spain or Italy, if I remember
> correctly, and maybe even more than England (Benny ?). In spite of this
> trend, Germany has been able to field decent national teams. I don't
> think you can make any generalisations at all, as national team form
> sometimes tracks several years behind club performance in a given league.
Germany had a revival in '06. Before that their team had been down in
the doldrums (relatively speaking) for the past decade.
But I do agree, any effect a domestic league can/will have on the
national team will always be after a lag period.
MH
alka...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 18, 1:19 pm, MH <nos...@ucalgary.ca> wrote:
>
>>alkami...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 17, 11:50 am, Benny <Be...@soccer-europe.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
>>>>>From : kenhig...@hotmail.com
>>>>
>>>>>And as for his bodgy stats, yes, there are plenty of foreign players
>>>>>in the EPL, just as there are plenty based in Spain and Italy (and
>>>>>have been for decades),
>>>>
>>>>Serie A and La Liga have HALF the number of foreigners. So far that's meant
>>>>nothing for the Spanish national side but I'm convinced it's a big factor to
>>>>Italy's success internationally, both in 2006 and historically.
>>>
>>>This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
>>>in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
>>>country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
>>>developed a foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's
>>>success internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982,
>>
>>This is just plain wrong, I am afraid. 1982 followed a total ban on
>>foreigners in Serie A which was later relaxed to 1 foreign import, (eg.
>>Brady on Juventus) and then to 2 starting after the 1982 world cup.
>
>
> Yes, I stood corrected on that point. My first exposure to Serie A was
> 84/85 when it seemed that almost all of the who's who of the world
> football played there.
By 84/85 that was getting to be true, though the limit of two per team
still mitigated against it. In the 84/85 season, the big names were
(approximately, my memory could be fading, and I could be out by a year
on some):
Juve Boniek/Platini
Inter Rumenigge/Brady
Roma Falcao/ Cerezo
Hellas Verona Elkjaer/Briegel
Udinese Zico
Milan Hately, ?
Sampdoria Souness/Francis
etc. I think Maradona had not yet moved to Napoli, and few of the big
Bundesliga stars (Matthäus, Brehme, Voller, Klinsmann, Häßler, Kohler
etc) that would later move to Italy had left yet. By 88-90 the foreign
contigent was much stronger.
I consequently assumed that that had been the
> case for a long time. The only otehr league I followed then was the
> English one where the only foreigners were a couple of Argentinians at
> Spurs with a few Olsen's, Molby's, and Metgod's sprinkled here and
> there.
That is not entirely true, depending on your definition of foreigner.
In the early 80s (80-85) the most successful clubs in England were (not
necessarily in order)
Liverpool (Hansen, Dalglish, Souness, Nicol, Wark, Whelan, Rush,
Grobelaar, Johnston, Beglin etc.)
Everton (Gray, Sheedy, Southall, Sharpe, Ratcliffe, Van den Hauwe)
Spurs (Galvin, Hughton, Archibald, Villa, Ardiles)
Villa (drawing a blank here, but I remember 2 scots at least)
Ipswich (Burley, Wark, Brazil, Muhren, Thijssen)
Arsenal (Nicholas, ...)
Man Utd (Strachan, Olsen, Whiteside, Stapleton, Moran, Mcgrath,
Albiston, Hughes)
My point being that the top English sides always had a fair number of
non-English players, and that at one point UEFA did decide to count
these as "foreigners". Several of the teams above often lined up with
over half the team not English, so the situation hasn't changed that
radically - just that the foreigners are no longer Scots, Irishmen or
Welshmen,
>
>
>>Serie
>>
>>
>>>A's dominance of the international talent pool was arguably near its
>>>peak.
>>
>>Nobody can argue that. Serie A began to dominate the international
>>talent pool AFTER 1982, and it did not peak until the late 80s/early
>>90s, when teams were allowed three foreigners.
>
>
> Even so, here is Italy's international record in major cups in the
> late 80s and 90s:
>
> EC88 - Semifinals
> WC90 - Semifinals
> EC92 - Did not qualify
> WC94 - Final
> EC96 - Group stage
> WC98 - Quaterfinals
> EC00 - Final
>
> Pretty impressive. With a lot of foreigners in their league.
Germany over same period (with fewer big name foreigners in league, and
in fact, many stars playing abroad)
88 semi-finals
90 winners
92 final
94 qf
96 winners
98 qf
00 group stage.
Having big name foreigners and the strongest league in Europe didn't
destroy Italy's national team, far from it. But it didn't make it even
close to the most successful national team in Europe.
>
>
>> So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory.
>>
>>
>>>What is certain here is that the biggest beneficiaries of the global
>>>player markets are countries like Holland and Portugal which are
>>>international powers yet have a financially small league. This
>>>effectively means that they produce excellent players who they ship
>>>out to the big leagues to get even better while at the same time
>>>creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of course
>>>this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
>>>losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain.
>>>Italy somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something
>>>right. (or be very lucky!)
>>
>>The Bundesliga has more foreigners than Spain or Italy, if I remember
>>correctly, and maybe even more than England (Benny ?). In spite of this
>>trend, Germany has been able to field decent national teams. I don't
>>think you can make any generalisations at all, as national team form
>>sometimes tracks several years behind club performance in a given league.
>
>
> Germany had a revival in '06. Before that their team had been down in
> the doldrums (relatively speaking) for the past decade.
England would be lucky to experience a period of doldrums like that !
Germany got further than England in 1996, 1998, and 2002. And they have
not failed to qualify for any tournament as far back as I can remember.
> But I do agree, any effect a domestic league can/will have on the
> national team will always be after a lag period.
And vice versa. French league picked up after national team success in
1982-86, for example. Moved from 15th in UEFA rankings in 1986 to 6th in
1990 - at the beginning of the decade, they had been 8th, 6th and 6th.
So they were sinking at the time of the best years of the platini
generation national team. Germany were only 6th in 1972 (best ever
national team according to experts) but had risen to top by 1976-80,
which included years (76, 78) when the national team was not at its best.
>
barca4...@hotmail.com
Alkami:
> > > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only
> > > in comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the
> > > country with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England
> > > developed a foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's
> > > success internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982,
MH:
> > This is just plain wrong, I am afraid. 1982 followed a total ban on
> > foreigners in Serie A which was later relaxed to 1 foreign import, (eg.
> > Brady on Juventus) and then to 2 starting after the 1982 world cup.
Alkami:
> Yes, I stood corrected on that point. My first exposure to Serie A was
> 84/85 when it seemed that almost all of the who's who of the world
> football played there. I consequently assumed that that had been the
> case for a long time. The only otehr league I followed then was the
> English one where the only foreigners were a couple of Argentinians at
> Spurs with a few Olsen's, Molby's, and Metgod's sprinkled here and
> there.
MH:
> > The Bundesliga has more foreigners than Spain or Italy, if I remember
> > correctly, and maybe even more than England (Benny ?). In spite of this
> > trend, Germany has been able to field decent national teams. I don't
> > think you can make any generalisations at all, as national team form
> > sometimes tracks several years behind club performance in a given league.
I agree. There doesn't seem to be a direct correlation at all.
> Even so, here is Italy's international record in major cups in the
> late 80s and 90s:
> EC88 - Semifinals
> WC90 - Semifinals
> EC92 - Did not qualify
> WC94 - Final
> EC96 - Group stage
> WC98 - Quaterfinals
> EC00 - Final
> Pretty impressive. With a lot of foreigners in their league.
Well it was equally impressive during the foreigner ban with
EC68 - Champions
WC70 - Runner up
EC72 - Quarterfinal
WC74 - First Round
EC76 - First Round
WC78 - 4th Place
EC80 - 4th Place
WC82- Champions
So as MH says, the foreign content didn't seem to have a huge effect
one way or another, though many agree that Italian calcio grew in
strength from 1966 onwards because of the ban, though others believe
that the 1949 plane crash that took 10 national team players. Many
believe it took a good decade to recover from this.
kenh...@hotmail.com
Wrong again.
I never agreed with that assertion of yours, despite your
protestations to the contrary.
You're welcome to fuel your sick little world with that moniker, but I
never agreed with you.
I doubt that I'd agree with you about abnything, you come across as a
total moron, a serial liar and someone who hasn't got the first idea
about football.
You're actually the worst sort of pathetic fan-boy that successful
clubs attract.
You always want to be supporting the 'top club' to fuel your pathetic
boasting, hence you've latched on to Barca because they're recent EC1
champs.
In a few years, you're quite likely to be supporting someone quite
different if Barca have 3 or 4 years of poor results
Higgs
kenh...@hotmail.com
was your exact quote.
Were there foreigners playing in Italy post 1966?
Yes or no?
Higgs
kenh...@hotmail.com
yet we both know there were foreign players playing in Italy,
certainly in 1969, and also in 1972.
You lied.
That's game, set, and match to me
Higgs
kenh...@hotmail.com
> > Subject : The EPL is officially the best !
>
> > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only in
> > comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the country
> > with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England developed a
> > foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's success
> > internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie A's dominance
> > of the international talent pool was arguably near its peak.
>
> It is not very debatable at all. Pre Bosman Italian clubs could only play with
> three foreigners, the same as most of the leagues in fact. On average 30% of
> players in Serie A squads are foreigners and that includes foreigners with
> Italian citizenship, in Spain it's 38%, France 34%, The Netherlands 39% and
> England 59%. This is based on data over the past 3 years and without checking
> I'm almost certain the EPL replacing Serie A as the richest league had very
> little effect on the foreign player levels in Italy. Italian clubs will
> generally have a strong core of Italian players.
>
Are you sure about those figures?
Barca insists that it is 79% for English clubs.
I think he read it on the back of a cornflake packet and is now
telling everyone that it is an undeniable fact.....
;-)
Higgs
kenh...@hotmail.com
>
> > This is a very debatable theory. Italy has fewer foreign imports only in
> > comparison to England, and historically Italy had always been the country
> > with the MOST foreign imports (until the 90s when England developed a
> > foreigner addiction). But this has never hindered Italy's success
> > internationally. In fact when they won the WC in 1982, Serie A's dominance
> > of the international talent pool was arguably near its peak.
>
> It is not very debatable at all. Pre Bosman Italian clubs could only play with
> three foreigners, the same as most of the leagues in fact. On average 30% of
> players in Serie A squads are foreigners and that includes foreigners with
> Italian citizenship, in Spain it's 38%, France 34%, The Netherlands 39% and
> England 59%. This is based on data over the past 3 years and without checking
> I'm almost certain the EPL replacing Serie A as the richest league had very
> little effect on the foreign player levels in Italy. Italian clubs will
> generally have a strong core of Italian players.
>
I think it's highly debatable.
In the modern era (post 1966? This seems a popular cut-off point on
this group, possibly because it excludes any English national success,
but whatever), we've had Brazil win 3 WCs, Germany 2, Argentina 2,
Italy 2 and France 1.
In EC1, we've had 8 Italian, 6 Dutch, 10 English, 5 Spanish, 1
Scottish, 6 German, 1 Rumanian, 1 Serbian, 1 French & 2 Portuguese
successes.
Given that we're primarily talking about English, Spanish and Italian
leagues, Italy comes out clearly ahead of the other two in national
terms, but the EPL shades it over Serie A for club success. And we are
actually talking about club football.
Then there's the other quantities like currently the EPL has the
highest proportion of foreigners in its ranks, but over the period in
question, Spanish and Italian clubs have had a higher % of foreigners
at various junctures. English clubs also sat out a ban for several
years and Italian clubs put a stop on further foreign imports for a
period.
What does that all tell us?
Well, not a lot, I think.
I'm not sure of the foreign representation in Brazilian soccer, and
I'm not sure of the foreign representation in German soccer.
Has it affected their national/club sides?
> > So Italy's case actually contradicts this theory. What is certain here is
> > that the biggest beneficiaries of the global player markets are countries
> > like Holland and Portugal which are international powers yet have a
> > financially small league. This effectively means that they produce excellent
> > players who they ship out to the big leagues to get even better while at the
> > same time creating room for more excellent young players to step in. Of
> > course this applies to Brazil and Argentina too. In this setup the real
> > losers (national team wise) are countries like England and Spain. Italy
> > somehow escapes this trend so they must be doing something right. (or be
> > very lucky!)
>
> The best coaches and tacticians in the world coupled with traditional strong
> defences, fantasistas, strikers and players who will die for the shirt. That's
> the 'secret'.
A 'secret' that several other clubs/countries seem to have cracked.
Personally, I'd have chosen Guus to coach England, had he been
available
Higgs
barca4...@hotmail.com
The likely reason why you come across so daft is that you cannot read.
I clearly
said that the top four English clubs field 78% foreign content. You
couldn't even get
the figure correct. Anyhow, I've presented the evidence, which you of
course will ignore
and in a failing endeavour. I own you.
barca4...@hotmail.com
I see, you are denying that the top four English clubs have 78%
foreign content, even though I presented the data that is irrefutable.
Well in addition to being a chronic liar, you are a chronic retard
too.
barca4...@hotmail.com
Higgs you retard. There was a ban on signing foreigners from 1966 to
1980. No Italian teams were allowed to sign any foreigner from....get
this....that time on. This is documented and fact. You arguing against
this, constantly, is just showing what a moron you truly are.
IN fact, almost everything you've argued against you've been wrong.
Why don't you tell us about Catennacio now? You won't because you know
nothing of it and I revealed you for the fool that you are. You even
tried saying that UEFA's coefficients were
somethind I made up. That too is well documented in these threads even
though you will now
say that this isn't so. You can't hide. I own you.
barca4...@hotmail.com
kenhig...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I'm not sure of the foreign representation in Brazilian soccer, and
> I'm not sure of the foreign representation in German soccer.
> Has it affected their national/club sides?
How can you ask a question of something you are not sure of? Seems a
bit narrow minded, doesn't it?
kenh...@hotmail.com
Indeed it's impressive, perhaps the most impressive being the 82 WC
win, which was of course, as you say, during the 66-80 ban on foreign
players.
I had a look on Wikipedia to see why the 1982 WC was played in 1980,
but I couldn't find any answers.
Here's you're arse, on a plate, again, you lying toe rag
Higgs
kenh...@hotmail.com
Better than not knowing and making it all up, which seems to be your
usual tactic
How about you answer a question for once.
You were the one who claimed
"You do know there was a foreigner ban in Italy from 1966 till 1980,
right?"
Yet there were foreigners playing in Italy post 66.
How did this happen?
Higgs